mercoledì 14 maggio 2014
martedì 13 maggio 2014
Inequality - writing test
It' s a fact that inequality does exist and that' s a sad reality, a problem that is producing other problems. The scope of my essay is to highlight the real effects of this phenomenon in all its different expressions. Does Obama have the power to solve this problem?
Inequality is the result of a mistaken cultural model that has characterized the last 30 years. It has presented a financial leadership that contributed to the increase in inequality.
In US, where democracy is culturally more representative, inequality has split society between rich and poor destroying the middle class. This gap is remarkable in Silicon Valley, where there is "the Jungle", the largest camp of homeless people in the country, that I consider the perfect exapmle of "inequality facing development".
I believe that the real battle will be played, between the rules of a socio-cultural model based on financial capitalism that has created a crisis of values and social, and the social care, the old values of cooperation and collaboration. This two strenghts have to find a compromise.
I think that the only way to revitalize this system is reform it. We need to change our vision and our consideration of social economy to reform this system and to fight inequality.
In conclusion I believe Inequality as a plague, I think that Obama has the "care" to fight this problem.
Spending on welfare is a great opportunity not only to revitalize the public finances but also to fight unemployment and poverty, he can also use the robin hood taxes to catch up with an equal distribution of the income.
Will the situation ever change? We can only jodge and possibly damn Obama' s reforms.
Inequality is the result of a mistaken cultural model that has characterized the last 30 years. It has presented a financial leadership that contributed to the increase in inequality.
In US, where democracy is culturally more representative, inequality has split society between rich and poor destroying the middle class. This gap is remarkable in Silicon Valley, where there is "the Jungle", the largest camp of homeless people in the country, that I consider the perfect exapmle of "inequality facing development".
I believe that the real battle will be played, between the rules of a socio-cultural model based on financial capitalism that has created a crisis of values and social, and the social care, the old values of cooperation and collaboration. This two strenghts have to find a compromise.
I think that the only way to revitalize this system is reform it. We need to change our vision and our consideration of social economy to reform this system and to fight inequality.
In conclusion I believe Inequality as a plague, I think that Obama has the "care" to fight this problem.
Spending on welfare is a great opportunity not only to revitalize the public finances but also to fight unemployment and poverty, he can also use the robin hood taxes to catch up with an equal distribution of the income.
Will the situation ever change? We can only jodge and possibly damn Obama' s reforms.
mercoledì 23 aprile 2014
Inequality, socio-cultural problems and possible reforms
SOCIO CULTURAL ARMAGEDDON
I
want to start with two questions:
What do you know about Armageddon?
And Why did some italian sociologists say that “Armageddon is closer than it appears”?
What do you know about Armageddon?
And Why did some italian sociologists say that “Armageddon is closer than it appears”?
- · In the first part I’ll introduce the so called socio-culutral armageddon
- · In the second part I’ ll give you some data and information about this phenomenon
- · Finally I’ ll describe the reasons of social inequality, the role of finance in this dangerous social shift and the possible reforms.
A socio-cultural
Armageddon: and the ongoing confrontation between finance and society.
Literally,
Armageddon is the place of the final conflict between good and evil, usually
mentioned during the medieval period.
Today, we have to face this conflict and we have to take part on this conflict. The cultural model that has characterized the last 30 years has presented a financial leadership that has contributed to increase inequality. Inequality, poverty , moral degradation , conflicts , individualism and a high level of social exasperation that is dangerously rising in our country are the results of this cultural model.
"Beware of false prophets, you shall know them by their fruits," reads the Gospel.
Well, the data on inequality and the consequences on the social background are the tragic representation of these "fruits".
The 85 richest people in the world have more wealth than the poorest 3.5 billion people combined, more than half of the population of the planet.
In Anglo-Saxon countries, where democracy is culturally stronger and more representative, inequality has split society.
In the U.S., the earnings of the richest 1% represent the 40% of national incomes and the trend is growing: more than a sixth of Americans needs a food stamp, poverty returns to the levels of 1963.
Moreover, the GDP with the same level of taxation increases inequality, giving unnecessary resources to the rich, taking away the middle class that holds up the system. In Silicon Valley, the spearhead of United States development, there is "The Jungle" , the largest camp of homeless people in the country.
But the gap between rich and poor is also remarkable in Britain. The five richest families have more wealth than the 20% poorest people in the country, and the last reforms were focused on less taxes to the rich and welfare cuts.
In Italy the situation is not different. The society is weakening and is living the same deep contradictions. According to the latest available studies (2012, supplied by the Department of Finance), 5% of higher revenues represent 22.7% of the total , and 10% of families own 46.6% of wealth.
In this sense finance is considered an incontrovertible and academic truth and an exact science, but it is based on a false hypothesis pursued with clear determination: it has accelerated the process of concentration of wealth, becoming a tool of the hegemonic global policies. It creates a world where “all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others”.
Finance becomes a parasitic system, a kind of locust in real economy, which is destructive, because money does not generate money. It destroyed the social systems and compromise the achievements of society and also the goals of Welfare State. The individualistic research of profits makes the decisions in the "perfect world" of finance: These decisions don’ t take care of their social effects.
Finance continues to lay down the law causing irreparable damages in the so called Common Law countries ( U.S. and Britain ), but the difficulties of the U.S. to maintain a strong position in the world influence (as the Crimean situation showed) are ruining the financial dominant system that now have to face a cultural model based on real economy.
Even the recent investments of American finance in our country (Blackrock fund), made with an unusual rapidity, show the important role that finance try to maintain in the policies of the country. But we must remember that our society is built on a tradition view of real economy, and not on finance. The latter is not in our DNA and so we will always be losers and dominated.
The real battle will be played, in the coming years, the rules of a socio-cultural model based on financial capitalism that has created a crisis of values and social conflicts will be discussed. Can a social model based on inequality and social disintegration be sustainable? Can the economy be superordinate to the society? History tells us that it is not possible, but once again we are here risking to find ourselves in front of the chaos, in a sort of Armageddon. Will we be able to understand it and to replace the "bellum omnium contra omnes" with the old sense of "societas”?
Today, we have to face this conflict and we have to take part on this conflict. The cultural model that has characterized the last 30 years has presented a financial leadership that has contributed to increase inequality. Inequality, poverty , moral degradation , conflicts , individualism and a high level of social exasperation that is dangerously rising in our country are the results of this cultural model.
"Beware of false prophets, you shall know them by their fruits," reads the Gospel.
Well, the data on inequality and the consequences on the social background are the tragic representation of these "fruits".
The 85 richest people in the world have more wealth than the poorest 3.5 billion people combined, more than half of the population of the planet.
In Anglo-Saxon countries, where democracy is culturally stronger and more representative, inequality has split society.
In the U.S., the earnings of the richest 1% represent the 40% of national incomes and the trend is growing: more than a sixth of Americans needs a food stamp, poverty returns to the levels of 1963.
Moreover, the GDP with the same level of taxation increases inequality, giving unnecessary resources to the rich, taking away the middle class that holds up the system. In Silicon Valley, the spearhead of United States development, there is "The Jungle" , the largest camp of homeless people in the country.
But the gap between rich and poor is also remarkable in Britain. The five richest families have more wealth than the 20% poorest people in the country, and the last reforms were focused on less taxes to the rich and welfare cuts.
In Italy the situation is not different. The society is weakening and is living the same deep contradictions. According to the latest available studies (2012, supplied by the Department of Finance), 5% of higher revenues represent 22.7% of the total , and 10% of families own 46.6% of wealth.
In this sense finance is considered an incontrovertible and academic truth and an exact science, but it is based on a false hypothesis pursued with clear determination: it has accelerated the process of concentration of wealth, becoming a tool of the hegemonic global policies. It creates a world where “all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others”.
Finance becomes a parasitic system, a kind of locust in real economy, which is destructive, because money does not generate money. It destroyed the social systems and compromise the achievements of society and also the goals of Welfare State. The individualistic research of profits makes the decisions in the "perfect world" of finance: These decisions don’ t take care of their social effects.
Finance continues to lay down the law causing irreparable damages in the so called Common Law countries ( U.S. and Britain ), but the difficulties of the U.S. to maintain a strong position in the world influence (as the Crimean situation showed) are ruining the financial dominant system that now have to face a cultural model based on real economy.
Even the recent investments of American finance in our country (Blackrock fund), made with an unusual rapidity, show the important role that finance try to maintain in the policies of the country. But we must remember that our society is built on a tradition view of real economy, and not on finance. The latter is not in our DNA and so we will always be losers and dominated.
The real battle will be played, in the coming years, the rules of a socio-cultural model based on financial capitalism that has created a crisis of values and social conflicts will be discussed. Can a social model based on inequality and social disintegration be sustainable? Can the economy be superordinate to the society? History tells us that it is not possible, but once again we are here risking to find ourselves in front of the chaos, in a sort of Armageddon. Will we be able to understand it and to replace the "bellum omnium contra omnes" with the old sense of "societas”?
I think that the
only way to revitalize this system is reform this system. We need to change our
vision of public spending and our consideration of social economy and we need
to think about benefits we can get from a spending policy.
Academic theory supposes that individualism and "profit motive" will open new horizons and new opportunities, but what everybody can show today is the increase of inequality and of unemployment. And now when we are speaking there are 3.3 millions of italians looking for a job and 600.000 guys unemployed, 4 millions are vulnerable to poverty and the poverty line grows every day of 650 units.
Academic theory supposes that individualism and "profit motive" will open new horizons and new opportunities, but what everybody can show today is the increase of inequality and of unemployment. And now when we are speaking there are 3.3 millions of italians looking for a job and 600.000 guys unemployed, 4 millions are vulnerable to poverty and the poverty line grows every day of 650 units.
Spending on welfare is a great opportunity not only to revitalize the public finances but also to fight unemployment and poverty. We have to invest in crucial and productive areas, and we will take these resources from a more equal redistribution of revenues from taxes.
We will follow the reforms of Giulio Tremonti, taxing the great multinational companies and cutting the gap between rich and poor (Robin Hood reforms), in a new vision of Equality.
Luca Luciani
lunedì 7 aprile 2014
8 of History' s best Investments
8 of history' s best investments
Who dares wins. This could be a good title for this article in which visionary (and also lucky) men were able to make a lot of money with a "simple" investment. I think that the central thread of this article is: Try to combine an intelligent investor with the right investment at the right time and you will give to your audience a great story to tell.
The author try to convince us to value these investments on their "ROI" [return on investments = (gain on investments-costs of investments)/costs of investments] that could be used clearly like an indicator of efficiency and so a good ROI means a good nature investments, but I want to focus my attention on the good nature of the investors.
Can we consider a folly the idea of investing $25 million ($135 million today) on a candy company? That is pointless for some of us. Investing $2.7 million ($20.4 million today) on a fast food company is also irrational. Investing $6.7 million ($9.9 million today) in an intagible "start up" is something crazy. But there are/were people in the world that try to "think differently" and so "act differently" and these people now are billionaire. This is an intelligent investor.
Key Vocabulary
...a man who jumped into the business early and exploited its value like no other.
...a budding business.
...go through the roof.
Who dares wins. This could be a good title for this article in which visionary (and also lucky) men were able to make a lot of money with a "simple" investment. I think that the central thread of this article is: Try to combine an intelligent investor with the right investment at the right time and you will give to your audience a great story to tell.
The author try to convince us to value these investments on their "ROI" [return on investments = (gain on investments-costs of investments)/costs of investments] that could be used clearly like an indicator of efficiency and so a good ROI means a good nature investments, but I want to focus my attention on the good nature of the investors.
Can we consider a folly the idea of investing $25 million ($135 million today) on a candy company? That is pointless for some of us. Investing $2.7 million ($20.4 million today) on a fast food company is also irrational. Investing $6.7 million ($9.9 million today) in an intagible "start up" is something crazy. But there are/were people in the world that try to "think differently" and so "act differently" and these people now are billionaire. This is an intelligent investor.
Key Vocabulary
...a man who jumped into the business early and exploited its value like no other.
...a budding business.
...go through the roof.
Lesson 7 02/04/2014
Negotiation Tips
American negotiation: Direct
British negotiation: Polite, with a sort of sense of humor
Horse Trading: hard bargaining to obtain equal concessions by both sides in a dispute.
Batna or bottom line: A term used by negotiators to describe the best option available to their side if negotiations fail.
Phrasal verbs can be:
Phrasal verbs
Key Vocabulary
We can offer you 35 percent / We can offer you a higher percentage.
American negotiation: Direct
British negotiation: Polite, with a sort of sense of humor
Horse Trading: hard bargaining to obtain equal concessions by both sides in a dispute.
Batna or bottom line: A term used by negotiators to describe the best option available to their side if negotiations fail.
Phrasal verbs can be:
- intransitive (no direct object)
- transitive (direct object)
- Separable: The object can go between the two parts of phrasal verb
To turn down my offer - To turn myoffer down - If the object is a pronouns, it must go between the two parts of transitive phrasal verbs
To turn it down.
Phrasal verbs
- To find out - to discover a fact or piece of information
The police found out who killed Lessie - To give up - To stop doing something that you do regularly
He gives up smoking - To turn down - To not accept an offer or a request
You are turning down a fantastic job - To fit in - To belong to a group
He refused the job because he didn' t fit in with with it. - To set (something) up - To start something such as a business
He decided to set the negotiations up - To bring up - To start discussing something
The other party try to bring up a new issue - To come back - To return to a place
We decided to come back to London for another holiday - To give (yourself) away - To show your feelings/your emotion
His face gives nothing away - To watch out - To be careful
If you don' t watch out, you could have an accident. - To point out - To tell someone something
He pointed out that he had a long trip - To go on - To continue doing something
He goes on talking. - To shut up - To stop talking
- To stand up - To put your body into an upright position.
Key Vocabulary
We can offer you 35 percent / We can offer you a higher percentage.
- arbitration - when a neutral person or group comes in to settle a disagreement
- commitment - an obligation to do something or deliver something
- compromise - an agreement where you get less than you want but also give less than the other person wants
- facilitation - a process where people, called facilitators, try to make it easier for two people to reach an agreement
- final agreement - the results of the negotation that everyone agrees to put into action
- impasse - when two sides hold different positions that they are unwilling to change
- intermediary - a person who communicates between the two sides of a negotiation
- issue - a topic that needs to be discussed in a negotiation
- mediation - when a neutral person or group comes in to identify the issues, explore options and clarify goals
- offer - one or more options that is sent by one negotiator to the other
- party - either side in a negotiation is called a party, whether one individual or a whole group
- proposal - any suggestion or idea given to one party from the other
lunedì 31 marzo 2014
The end of (french) bipolarism
http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21599830-very-bad-fran-ois-hollande-very-good-marine-le-pen-little-local-difficulty
Reading this article the main point I catch, comes from the words of the "Front National" leader, Marine le Pen. As she declars, the results of the last local elections signed the end of the bipolarism of french politics. I think that this is only a part of a change that is going to interest all the european countries. The political reality in all over Europe has changed some years ago with the introduction of the single european currency and with the loss of national identities. From than the "old" bipolarism (left and right wings) has started a gradual process of convergence, and the old political parties formed a new invisible front that we can consider "the front of the euro-adherents". The targets and the following reforms of the old parties have become the same. This monopolarism is doomed to become a new bipolarism with the constitution of the so called "euro-skeptic movements".
I think that the victory of FN in France is only a step that all the european countries have to faced, in this sense some movements have been born (Alba Dorata, Jobbik, German euroskeptic) and Italy lags behind (I don' t consider M5S a political party, but only a disorganized movement).
I want to send a message to Giorgia Meloni "out of the 'old' right-wing party there are grasslands of new opportunities and agreements".
Luca Luciani
Vocabulary:
To be braced for: Prepare mentally or emotionally for something unpleasant - esser pronti ad affrontare.
To be scalding: Essere bruciati.
To hang on: With the emphasis on the preposition, to keep hold; to hold fast; to stick; to be persistent, as a disease. Restare in attesa
Narrow majority: Stretta maggioranza
To be in an awkard position: Essere in una posizione scomoda
To get into the run-off: andare al ballottaggio.
Reading this article the main point I catch, comes from the words of the "Front National" leader, Marine le Pen. As she declars, the results of the last local elections signed the end of the bipolarism of french politics. I think that this is only a part of a change that is going to interest all the european countries. The political reality in all over Europe has changed some years ago with the introduction of the single european currency and with the loss of national identities. From than the "old" bipolarism (left and right wings) has started a gradual process of convergence, and the old political parties formed a new invisible front that we can consider "the front of the euro-adherents". The targets and the following reforms of the old parties have become the same. This monopolarism is doomed to become a new bipolarism with the constitution of the so called "euro-skeptic movements".
I think that the victory of FN in France is only a step that all the european countries have to faced, in this sense some movements have been born (Alba Dorata, Jobbik, German euroskeptic) and Italy lags behind (I don' t consider M5S a political party, but only a disorganized movement).
I want to send a message to Giorgia Meloni "out of the 'old' right-wing party there are grasslands of new opportunities and agreements".
Luca Luciani
Vocabulary:
To be braced for: Prepare mentally or emotionally for something unpleasant - esser pronti ad affrontare.
To be scalding: Essere bruciati.
To hang on: With the emphasis on the preposition, to keep hold; to hold fast; to stick; to be persistent, as a disease. Restare in attesa
Narrow majority: Stretta maggioranza
To be in an awkard position: Essere in una posizione scomoda
To get into the run-off: andare al ballottaggio.
Self Study "George Osborne's 2014 budget"
The main points of Osborne's budget:
- The budget will make english economy stronger: "This is a Budget for building a resilient economy."
- This budget will satisfy everyone: "If you’re a maker, a doer or a saver: this Budget is for you."
- The debt reduction program will cut the the public spending and it will be a sign of a healty economy: "Debt is lower." " And the biggest single saving of all is a £42 billion reduction in the interest payments we will have to make on that debt."
- The equation is Saving Costs = Saving family money: "Saving every family in the nation the equivalent of almost £2,000."
I don' t know anything about your debt situation and about your vision of the world, but I can recognize a humbug miles away. Italian policy is full of humbugs (last but not least Monti, Letta, Renzi), I think you can be the next. Rome is beautiful and full of wonderful women, pop in periodically!
A student
P.S.
Speak the truth and shame the devil
Iscriviti a:
Commenti (Atom)